The Daily Signal - The Daily Signal Presents “The “Signal Sitdown - What Trump Is Doing to End the Slaughter of Christians in Nigeria | Rep. Riley Moore

Episode Date: November 15, 2025

The horrific slaughter of Christians in Nigeria has caught the attention of President Donald Trump and the United States government. Trump has tapped Rep. Riley Moore, R-W.V., to provide a report about the situation unfolding in Nigeria, where estimates place the number of slaughtered Christians well over 50,000 since 2009, with more than 7,000 of these deaths having occurred in 2025 alone.  In Congress, Moore was one of the first voices drawing attention to the intensifying atrocities committed against Christians in Nigeria, and he joins ⁠“The Signal Sitdown”⁠ this week to discuss. “Nigeria is the most dangerous countries on the face of the planet to be a Christian,” Moore told ⁠The Daily Signal.⁠ “This has been happening for a very long time, and it's getting worse and worse and worse every year.” Keep Up With The Daily Signal   Sign up for our email newsletters:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.dailysignal.com/email⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠     Subscribe to our other shows:    The Tony Kinnett Cast: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL2284199939⁠ The Signal Sitdown: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL2026390376⁠   Problematic Women:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL7765680741⁠   Victor Davis Hanson: ⁠https://megaphone.link/THEDAILYSIGNAL9809784327⁠     Follow The Daily Signal:    X:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠https://x.com/intent/user?screen_name=DailySignal⁠ Instagram:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.instagram.com/thedailysignal/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Facebook:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://www.facebook.com/TheDailySignalNews/⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  Truth Social:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ https://truthsocial.com/@DailySignal⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠  YouTube:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠https://www.youtube.com/dailysignal?sub_confirmation=1⁠    Subscribe on your favorite podcast platform and never miss an episode. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Get no frills delivered. Shop the same in-store prices online and enjoy unlimited delivery with PC Express Pass. Get your first year for $2.50 a month. Learn more at pceexpress.ca. Hi, Bradley Devlin here, politics editor of The Daily Signal, and I'm excited to share this episode of my show with The Daily Signal called The Signal Sitdown with you. The Signal Sitdown is one of the Daily Signal's other podcasts, and each show I bring you inside the biggest battles in Washington, D.C., with some of the biggest names in politics.

So if you like what you hear today, make sure you subscribe to the Signal Sitdown for weekly episodes. We'll see you there. Nigeria is the most dangerous country on the face of the planet to be a Christian. There's not a more dangerous country right now. This has been happening for a very long time, and it's getting worse and worse and worse. Every year, it gets worse. And as you mentioned, just this year alone, 7,000 Christians, our brothers and sisters in Christ, have been martyred and murdered in Nigeria.

Thank you so much for tuning in to The Signal Sitdown. But before we get to the interview, we'd love it if you'd hit that like and subscribe button on YouTube, Spotify, or wherever you may be joining us. And please remember to give us a phone. five-star review because we love your feedback. Remember, it's your government, and together we'll expose how it really works and how to affect real change. Without further ado, here's the interview. Congressman Riley Moore, welcome back to the Signal Sitdown. Yeah, thanks for having me back. Of course, and we're here to talk about probably one of the most tragic things happening in the

world today, and that is the mass slaughter of Christians in Nigeria and all around the world, really. Trump has warned Nigeria that he could go in guns ablazing if this is not resolved. This issue of the slaughter of Christians is not resolved. You are one of the few members of Congress who have been paying attention to this issue for a long time. For folks at home who don't know, 50,000 Christians have been killed in Nigeria since 2009. 7,000 abouts have been killed in 2025 loan. First off, where are we right now? What's been going on in Nigeria?

And second, when did you become interested in this? When did you learn about this? A long time ago, actually. So I used to be staff on the House Foreign Affairs Committee. And so I remember the Save Our Girls and all of that when President Obama had elevated the issue and Boko Haram came on to the scene around 2000. So I was around for all that. And this has been an issue that's bothered me for a long time, not just Nigeria, but just writ large the persecution of Christians around the world, the Middle East, obviously being a terrible example of that, Syria being one of them in particular. So, but Nigeria is the most dangerous country on the face of the planet to be a Christian. There's not a more dangerous country right now. So this has been happening for a very long time.

and it's getting worse and worse and worse. Every year, it gets worse. And as you mentioned, just this year alone, 7,000 Christians, our brothers and sisters in Christ, have been martyred and murdered in Nigeria. And some startling and terrible examples of that is when we had a priest on Ash Wednesday, who was kidnapped and murdered. We had just over 50 congregants during Palm Sunday, who were massacred on Palm Sunday. And the dynamics of it are obviously complex. It's not one singular group in the northeast of the country. That's where Boko Haram is. I-S. West Africa or ISWAP. And so they're in there. And then you have in the middle band of the country, that's where this Fulani tribe is. This is the herdsman. And this is where you get a lot of

contact points in terms of the violence is in the middle band of the country. It's also in the northeast as well where Christians exist. But you have to kind of look at the way the country's divided. Essentially the southern part of the country is Christian. The northern part of the country is majority Muslim. And in that middle, it's obviously a mixture of that. So that's where you get a lot of this violent attacks taking place where people are literally losing their life for the profession in their faith in our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. So, All three of these groups are doing this. They have different and varying ultimate objectives. Obviously, Boko Haram, which is more al-Qaeda, ISIS now, kind of affiliated even though now IS West Africa and Boko Haram seem to be in a conflict with each other currently.

They have different objectives, some of that related around territory. The Falani, obviously, they want all the Christians in that middle band gone. And all for different reasons, but there's one specific thing that ties all this together is the genocide of Christians. All of their objectives, in their view, are being hindered by the presence of Christians in that country. And let's try to pick this apart piece by piece, right? We talk about Boko Haram and then IS West Africa. that when they, of course, they're acting against Christians all the time,

but when they do act against Christians, it's violent, it's terror-based, right? Yes. But that middle band of the country, the Falani tribe, this is kind of your day-to-day ethnic and religious conflict that continues to bubble towards the surface, right? The nature of the attacks in these different regions are a little bit different. Is that correct? They are.

Obviously, in the northeast is where you'll see, IS West Africa, Boko Haram, just massacre entire villages, just wiped them out. But you will see the Fulani come in and they'll attack them at church. We just had last week a Pentecostal pastor was murdered along with 10 of his congregants and another one kidnapped by the Fulani's. So ultimately they still have the same problem that they're trying to do, which is us, Christians that they need gone to essentially Islamify the entire country of Nigeria, which is the largest country in Africa, sixth largest country in the world. It's huge. And these Christians are

obviously a problem for them. So that's why, you know, they all have different objectives. We all are familiar with the ISIS kind of terrorist franchise model, right, where, you know, you have different affiliates of it popping up, ultimately that what they want is a Caliph. fate within a certain region. Boko Haram and IS have similar goals in terms of political objectives of either taking over swaths of land up there and wholly controlling it, remember Syria, same type of thing, or completely overthrowing the Nigerian government and having it a completely Muslim country. Now, the country is currently led for the first time by a Muslim vice president and a Muslim president, Tanubu.

That is a new type of thing that we have going on, new dynamic. Previously, it had been split in between. We'd have Muslim president, Christian vice president. This is the first time you have this happening. And so the government itself has essentially been turning a blind eye to this. And they have had... And they previously didn't when they had more Christian representation in their executive. Yes. Well, and then also not just...

just more representation, but we also had a designation on them, which is the thing that I have been asking for, which President Trump did. Thank God, he did. And I knew once this had risen to his level, he would approve it, which is designating them a country of particular concern, which he did do that. Now, when they were designated that under the first Trump administration, we saw these killings diminish. They had slowed down. The Biden administration took that designation off because they said these killings that were happening of Christians were actually had more to do with land disputes related to climate change and not targeting Christians for their faith, which is obviously ridiculous. So we know that that's what's happening. There's evidence that is so

clear on this, and we've been talking to folks on the ground, different organizations, religious organizations, and the evidence is mountainous on this. Yeah, so let's step one, a country of particular concern. What does that designation do? What does it mean under the Religious Freedom Act? What type of powers does it provide the President or the United States to counteract the savagery happening in Nigeria? So once a country is designated as a country of particular concern, under the

the International Religious Freedom Act, that unlocks 15 different levers that the president can use. So that can be from restriction and prohibition of foreign aid to that country, also prohibiting or restricting arms sales, train and equip, which we have been doing with Nigeria for a long time. We're talking about over $2 billion, billions of dollars at this point, actually, security assistance has gone to Nigeria in the agreement that they would use it to stop Boca Haram and these other terrorist organizations operating in their country. Obviously, that's not happening. It can also allow the president do targeted sanctions on individuals and organizations within that country and also stop, prohibit funds from flowing from international financial

institutions. So there's a few examples of the 15 levers now that are unlocked for the president to be able to use. And the president being who he is, who's been a great leader, and a great leader as it relates to peace in the world, why has he been so effective? Because he always puts all options on the table. He's not going to limit himself. This is why he talked about guns ablazing, is that they need to know that he is very serious about this. And he will not limit his options, obviously. So that's part of, I think, what the president is trying to do right now in negotiate this. And things I do want to highlight here, this is a great opportunity for the Nigerian government. and president to Nubu to actually strengthen and deepen their relationship with the United States.

This doesn't have to be all sticks. There can be some carrots in this. So this is a good opportunity for them if they will take it. I want to come back to the guns of blazing in a second, but I want to revisit what the Biden administration was saying about this. 2021, they remove Nigeria as a country of particular concern over these claims of climate change being the source of the real conflict. I don't know about you, Congressman, but when I have a territorial dispute over climate, I typically don't go into church and murder a bunch of Christians. What was the logic there? Was it weaponized incompetence on behalf of the Biden administration?

you know, turning a blind eye to this altogether, was it, the Biden administration, did they actually believe that this was rooted in climate change? I do think they believe that. And so what they will tell you is these, this Fulani tribe, which they're herdsmen, they have tons of cattle and where they want to graze the cattle that's in dispute. And what they will say is because of climate change, there's a limited now. or a limiting number of spaces where they can do that. So the answer to that is to go burn people live into church.

So it's laughable, obviously, in a tragic situation. I think also we've seen this on the left now more and more. There is a very prevalent part of the left that is not only anti-West, but very anti-Christian. they don't want to stand up for people of Christian faith. That to me is very clear. So if we were talking about some disparate group of Muslims somewhere that's being persecuted by some other group, I am sure it'd be all hands on deck to stop some type of genocide. But I think because these are Christians, which to them correlates to Western, they don't

want to deal with it. And they've been turning a blind eye to this for a long time. I mean, you heard Obama back in the, you know, bring our girls back, that was the last time. You've heard a Democrat say one word about this. Why do you think that is? Why do you think there is a difficulty on the left right now to stand up for these Christian communities? I think another touch point for the Trump administration has been the conflict between Azerbaijan and Armenia that the president, that President Trump was able to broker a deal in. and as they continue down that pathway towards peace, you know, he's not being celebrated or heralded in the media, not nearly as much as he is or would be if he managed to solve other conflicts in the world.

And those seem to have, you know, Christian identity and Christian's ability to worship are fundamental, central to both of the conflicts that we're talking about right now. So what is that allergen that the left has at the moment for Christianity? Well, I mean, it's not just abroad, obviously. And President Trump to be able to broker peace in this Nagranakarbo conflict that was in between Armenia and Azerbaijan going on for decades if people aren't familiar. It's really tragic what has happened there. But, of course, President Trump is the one singular figure in history who's been able to do that because he does care about these issues.

He cares about Christians. He made that very clear in a statement. But look, these aren't just Christians. Christians aren't just being either ignored or set aside when they're being persecuted in foreign countries. As a Catholic myself, just flashed back to the last administration where they're spying on Catholic parishes and parishioners because we're right-wing extremists, it's insane. So it's happening in our own country, too. It's not just abroad. It's here as well. And, you know, you have this bizarre coalition of socialist Islamic cultural revolutionaries right now that have popped up. Mondami's obviously a great example of

that in New York. That's where they are right now. That's the leading edge. for their political ideology and brand. And so what do they do to Catholics like me and others around this country? Patriotic people who are just trying to practice their faith, they spy on us. The FBI literally spying on Catholics in this country. Right. They did. And they felt quite a backlash in the 2024 election.

That's for sure. That, I think, was a radicalizing moment for a lot of Christians in this country. You know, Catholics are often maligned as the Christians who vote blue most of the time. You and I being Catholics, we're like, you know. Not this last time. Not this last time. Not this last time. But it's, I think that it has really been a wake-up call for Christians in this country to realize not only what's happening in our country, but what's happening around the world to Christian populations and Christian communities.

And I really do think you're onto something here with the idea that this rising globalist anti-Christian coalition that includes everyone from Islamists to social justice warriors, you know, flying the progress flag. Don't forget the trans communities involved in this. Of course, right? Like, it all points back to, I think, their real deep hatred for the independence that, you know, a Christian mind provides somebody in their day-to-day lives, right? That's just intolerable to a lot of regimes and increasingly our own regime, and it's scary. Going back to Nigeria, though, the government of Nigeria has turned a blind eye to this issue. But our relationship with this government continues.

We provide logistical support and training to their military, several large U.S. corporations, have facilities there, in particular energy corporations like Exxon has large facilities there. What is our current relationship with the Nigerian government? What is our current interest in the Nigerian situation? Well, we're providing security assistance and training for now. We're going to see what's going to happen there. And we want the Nigerian government to be a partner with us in this, in defeating this persecution of Christians and stopping this genocide that's going on over there. That's what we want to happen. And it's in their best interest to work with us as a partner on this. Now, in terms of our interests in it, obviously you have this

genocide taking place that President Trump, myself, and many others in Congress, we have serious interest in that. But they are the largest and one of the most developed countries in the continent of Africa. So we do want to see them succeed. And I do want to point out in this approach, whatever approach we end up taking here, me, myself, and I think many others, I have no interest in regime change. I have no interest in, you know, institutional building, nation building, any of this other nonsense we've gone through over the last several decades. This is a very targeted and specific issue.

They can run their country however they want to, but they're not going to murder every Christian that exists in it. We're not going to allow that to happen. Certainly without the support of the United States, right? We're not going to do that with the support of the United States. No. And this is why, you know, I've paid attention to your career so closely because you have been, I think, one of the best critics on the right of GOP foreign policy in the past,

this kind of new generation of conservative leader that wants to rethink America's role in the world. The wars on terror were a disaster. I mean, you are one who knows that the Iraqi Christian community, was obliterated. Decimated. By U.S. intervention in Iraq, you know, as well as I do, that there was two million Christians in Syria, and now there's only 500,000 Christians in Syria.

In Libya, same thing. After the Gaddafi regime fell, Christians became a target for persecution and for murder with the failed state of, within the failed state of Libya. And so what do you say to someone who thinks similarly to you on the issues of foreign policy on the war on terror and says, listen, I understand what you're trying to do here in protecting Christians abroad. I think that's a much better use of our resources than some of the other military misadventures. Sure. But I'm concerned that this is going to backfire if we do this irresponsibly. And, you know, I haven't seen. my government act with that level of responsibility in its previous conflicts. I mean, how do you respond? No, that's right.

And to be clear, I think this can be done without any military kinetic response. And we're going to see if that's possible as we continue to work with this. We do have the Nigerians are coming over here at some point this month to meet with the White House to meet with me and several other congressional stakeholders who have been working on this. I want to find a solution to this with them, not against them. And I think I want to make that very clear. And I know they kind of listen to everything that I say, so I'm sure they're listening to this. Every time I'm on some platform somewhere saying something, I see like some direct quote on Twitter or whatever from the government. So it's so, but I do want to make that clear.

but when you're talking about limited prioritized deterrence, which is really kind of what I'm talking about here is deterring a type of serious crime that's going on. And a great example would be Trump in Iran. Obviously, that was very targeted, limited strike with a very specific. specific objective to deter and prevent a nuclear program in Iran. The United States is in a position at some points where we will have to protect our interests. Somebody would say it sounds like that's in the realism category. And yes, you are correct. But I also don't believe in runaway realism where I can justify anything at any time for intervention at any cost because we have to prioritize those things as well. And I think that falls into a bucket that should and would be.

And I think it is a priority of the American people to ensure that we don't see Christians wiped off the map in a country like Nigeria. I think that's a, we are a Christian nation. Why would we not stand up for our brothers and sisters in Christ? We're not talking. about trying to do some institution building over in Nigeria and all these. They can handle their affairs however they want in terms of governance, but they have to protect this population of Christians, and we want to work with them on that. And I think we're going to be able to come to an agreement on how to do that. I'm hopeful. That's true. Come to an agreement without using kinetic options, which you, I believe, stated previously.

Unless it was in cooperation and coordination with the Nigerians, which that might be one of the outcomes here. Right, might be one of the outcomes because the Nigerians want to face Boko Haram more directly or something of that nature. Because it is, it is a threat to them as well. They don't want this government to exist. They want to take over territory. I.S. West Africa and Boko Haram, they want to take things from them. Territory, taxes, everything, resources, this, that, the other, all for the caliphate. So there are mutual interests here. There are mutual interests here, but certainly, though, also do not want to see the United States dragged into some type of protracted conflict because on the other side of this,

ISIS and Al-Qaeda affiliates, they are very well aware of the benefits of them escalating something with us and dragging us in where we're in some protracted conflict with them for a very long time, which President Trump's instincts are the complete opposite of that. And this is why I feel so confident in the approach that the president's going to end up taking here, which we'll see what that is. But his instincts are so good on those types of issues. And I think it's worth looking at and studying the approach that he's taken on this. So that's what they're going to want to do. And we also want to avoid reprisals on Christian communities as well. We go drop some 2,000 pound j-dam on some group of Muslims that are terrorists out there. And then that

equals even greater reprisals on the Christian communities, which then pulls us even further. And, you know, so the dominoes fall. Right. I'm purely with this type of actor, a chance of further radicalization, further recruitment for an, for an organization like, like the Islamic State West Africa or Boko Haram, right? Yes. And so this not this, but these non-kinetic options, right? There is a possibility of kinetic options. The Department of War has said that it has developed airstrike plans. It has developed plans for boots on the ground. One of the things I think restraint-oriented people struggle with is, listen, we may have some agreements on helping Nigeria with its security, but we have no treaty obligations to this country.

We have no large military installations or bases within this country. And so what does a non-kinetic option look like? Does that mean that we all of a sudden have a large base in Nigeria? No, that's not what that looks like. That falls within those 15 levers that have been unlocked now from that designation as a country of particular concern. That's why you have all those levers in there in terms of prohibiting dollars from flowing security assistance at that, all those other things that I mentioned at the outset of that. That would be the non-kinetic military options.

And perhaps there will be some, which we hope would be in coordination with the Nigerians. That would be the optimal outcome to provide some additional technological support to them that they currently don't have. But look, they have fixed-wing assets. They have attack helicopters that they're currently getting delivered right now and being trained on. They do have serious military equipment. I think it's also a question of prioritization on their side. So they need to make it a priority. And that's what we're trying to do is to raise the volume of this conversation so we can protect Christians.

And to your point of, well, we don't have a military base there, what are our interests, what are our equities, the ones that you laid out, essentially all have some monetary value on it. This isn't a monetary value question. This is a question of your religious faith and conviction and your spiritual. in your spiritual connection to your brothers and sisters in Christ, and if this is something that moves you, which I think it moves many, the plight of which there's currently suffering in that country. But you feel spiritually compelled to act on behalf of Christians being slaughtered across the world.

I have no qualms with that whatsoever. There has been, though, it appears, a divergence in how some people would go about it. So as we're talking about non-kinetic options, those 15 levers that President Trump can pull, others who feel strongly also the plight of these Christians, like Senator Ted Cruz, have advocated for a much more hawkish response. It's suggesting that guns of blazing isn't as bad of an idea as some might suggest. I don't think the first option is to roll up a strike. go after these groups persecuted Christians in Nigeria, there seems to also be an overstatement

of Nigeria's prominence strategically, right? Like, all of a sudden, well, it's actually to counter China. Well, actually, it's the linchpin of Africa. It's super necessary. It's the largest. You have all those things, right? Is China in there? Of course, China's in there.

You know, this idea, it's to counter China. Sure. I'd say those are second and third order considerations in some of this. It's not primary, though. Right. But you know this also all too well, working on Capitol Hill for the House Foreign Affairs Committee, your experience in Washington now. Once that ball starts rolling, it kind of takes on a momentum of its own. And you have like four or five different iterations of an argument for military intervention in a place before we've even really level set and define. our terms and figured out what our interests are. And this is why you heard me mention that term runaway realism, right? Right. So where you start to justify a lot of different, it's like, well, we got to do this because

of this, this, and that. And then, you know, sure, you know. I'm sure it's an interesting op-ed to read. But the point here is we have to be targeted and restrained in the manner in which we're going to go forward and solve this process. problem, which President Trump has been able to demonstrate that now eight different times. And that's why I feel confident that he's going to be able to do that here as well. And obviously, the president in that true social post, you mentioned, he mentioned me specifically

to report back to him on this. And we are working on that right now. We're working on putting together a findings for the president and what we have gotten from our interlocutors on the ground and the folks that we've been talking to in the conversations that we've been having as well and talk to President Trump about that once we have it all, I think, in a place where I'd feel confident that we're giving him the best information on that. So that's something that I'm working on really hard right now. Any sneak peek that you can get. No, no, we're not sneak peeking No sneak peeks on air. Fair enough. Fair enough. When we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, when we, we, when we, we, we're, we're in something like this. As, you know, take us inside, like, when you're tasked with something like this as a representative. It could be on the slaughter of Christians in Nigeria. It could be on the health care premiums right now for Obamacare, right? Members of Congress are constantly putting together findings like this. Senator Ron Johnson came on here and talked about his findings. With, we're the Butler's Pennsylvania assassination attempt on the president, right? How does that actually

work? How do you go about this fact-finding? Because people think that these days, members of Congress, all they do is get little snippets in congressional hearings and blast it out on social media, go on TV, and vote occasionally. But there's a lot of legwork that needs to be done when you're talking about a real political issue like the massacre of Christians in Nigeria. Yes. And for me, you know, put my old staffer hat back on. I used to be the guy that was writing the reports. So I have a pretty good sense of what that's going to take. I would say you're going to see myself, Congressman Chris Smith, who's always been a leader on this issue as well. President Trump mentioned the Appropriations Committee. We're probably going to bring House Foreign Affairs Committee into this as well, my old alma mater. And we're going to work together. to put this report into place. We did one when I was there on Iranian influence in the Western Hemisphere back in the day, which is really interesting report. I don't know how many people read it, but it's out there. So these are the types of things Congress should be doing.

How often does a president, you know, specific like task a member to do that? I'm not sure. I've not seen it that often, but president has asked, I will do, along with talking. Tom Cole, who's the chair of the House Appropriations Committee, we are currently every day working on this, and we want to get the president the best information. So we have to turn now to the government shutdown. In a few minutes, you are going to be heading back over to Capitol Hill voting on this deal struck by Senate Democrats and Senate Republicans, well, a few Senate Democrats and Senate Republicans to reopen the federal government. you are from West Virginia that is a state that well defines well encapsulates the I think Trump MAGA movement right then they are massively supportive of the president oh yeah his agenda but they are not your country club Bush George W. Bush supporting type of Republican

they are not they feel government shutdowns acutely right the Republican based now in 2025 feels government shutdowns more acutely than the the the the Republican base of 2025 did. So this has been the longest government shutdown ever. Republicans didn't give away the farm. I was a little surprised. Not going to lie. Where do we sit right now?

I mean, how have your constituents felt this? How are they feeling about this shutdown coming to an end? Well, the SNAP benefit issue has been awful. So one in six of my constituents receive SNAP benefits. So that aspect of it has been terrible. It's been illuminating, though, to realize that the lengths to which Democrats will go to inflict pain and suffering on the American people to achieve their own political objectives out here. I think it's really tragic. I think it's horrible.

And I know those group of Democrats that eventually ended up voting to reopen the government, which Schumer and the rest of the Democrats had held hostage, they wanted to do this weeks ago. They wanted to do this week. They know. They knew this was a bad move. And I think they'd just put themselves in a corner on it. Part of it was political, obviously. It's interesting to me where it's like, oh, you know, we needed to win these elections in Virginia and New Jersey and, you know, this helped turnout.

Maybe that's true. Maybe it is. I mean, does it concern me Democrats winning in Democrat states? It's not really. I mean, I think the consultants in D.C. need to like change the slide deck and update it on Virginia. It's still kind of stuck in 90s mode. Let's put a new date on it. This idea of like we're going to go win Virginia. Look, we have Glenn Yonkin. That's great. They also got a Democrat governor in Kentucky. I mean, the Democrats aren't marching down to Kentucky to go take that place over, right? This has been a Democrat state in trending in that direction since the 90s. Since 2016, only two states have gotten bluer, Washington State and Virginia. That's it. So none of this is surprising to me, but yeah, the shutdown has been terrible for a lot of the constituents in my district. We couldn't have MSHA. If you're not familiar with MSHA, that's mining safety. We need them on coal mine sites. And we've had a couple mines that haven't been able

to run during all of this, which is awful. So these folks aren't getting paid. Mines aren't operating, tax revenue is not coming into the state from the severance tax. Yeah, I mean, there's a lot of things that we've been getting hit on in this shutdown. And like you pointed out, I mean, you're talking about like the heart of MAGA, West Virginia, over 70 percent is the percentage total that President Trump won in the last election, the state of West Virginia. And that's been three times now. It's been around 70 percent. We have voted for him. I mean, maybe why Wyoming's bigger than us in terms of the vote total percentage, but it won't be by much. No, I mean, it's one of the reddest states in the union, that's for sure.

And it's, you know, you talked a little bit about Snap, but the other big issue for the shutdown fight has been Obamacare subsidies and health care. Obviously, rising costs of health care, pre-Oabomacare, was already putting the strain on the American family. Obamacare comes along, and those prices still continue to go up. The only solution that people can possibly think of is to subsidize the heck out of everything. Just give handouts to massive insurance companies, which should make, I don't know, I'm surprised that more left-leaning people don't have their corporate power antenna going up and going off.

But they, for some reason, they haven't. It hasn't. And talk to us about the healthcare conversation and how it's affected your constituents. and what might be cooked up in the House and Senate in the coming months. Yeah, I mean, I think the Democrats took that antenna down quite a while ago. They are totally corporate captured at this point. But it was still so shocking to me that like Bernie Sanders and AOC are doing a walk-and-talk video about how great these subsidies are, when they're handing them to all these big insurance companies that Bernie Sanders built his brand on going after.

Oh, I know. Isn't it shocking? Yeah, it is shocking. And I'm not expecting like Chuck Schumer to be the guy who's anti-insman. Right, right, right, right. Bernie Sanders? Yeah, I had a little bit more respect for you, Bernie. Yeah, I mean, like, these folks, if you don't give us more money, we're going to raise your premiums.

Do you think this will be the first time we're going to be in this type of situation with the insurance companies? I doubt it. I doubt that. And I love President Trump's rebuttal to all this is, why don't we just give it to the people, put in HSAs and let them figure out what they want to do with the money in terms of of their insurance. The Affordable Care Act turned out to be the unaffordable care act. And ever since it came into place and distorted the market, insurance premiums have been going up. And they continued to go up. We had something in the reconciliation bill, the one big beautiful bill that was actually going to help lower everybody's premiums, not just Obamacare premiums. But the Democrats

actually stripped that out because they knew this fight was coming. Also like to point out, these subsidies are COVID subsidies. This was for the COVID era subsidies, and they put the end date on it, not us. So they're the ones who decided that this is going to be the end date. We have to do something here to address the root cause of the skyrocketing price of health care and just giving insurance companies more money. I don't really think that's the answer here. As we look forward to potentially another shutdown conversation,

Uh, January is going to be the new date if this CR passes in the House. It's going to pass, which we, we take it to the bank. Take it to the bank. It's going to pass. Whip feels good. Yeah. We could be in the same situation in January. Do you think Democrats have learned their lesson here?

I mean, longest shutdown in history, nothing to show for it except for a hypothetical show vote in the Senate that will probably fail on the, on the expansion of these subsidies. without reform, right? If there are reforms and there is a deal brokered, maybe it has a chance of passing both chambers. But it's not going to pass

in its current form, right? No. They got nothing here. Would they be willing to shut down the government again in January? Well, first of all, it'd be a partial shutdown

because there's three bills attached to this CR, right? So we got military construction of Veterans Affairs, we have agriculture, which deals with the SNAP benefits and then the legislative branch. They have already put...

Which means that staffers will get paid if the government shuts down in January. Correct? Correct. Yeah. Now, they're already, the Democrats already put on the hotline several other appropriations bills, defense, labor, HHS, CJS, Commerce Justice, Science, and T HUD, which Transportation, Housing, Urban Development. So they have tested those to see if they're going to go. I think we're going to get another package of bills that are going to come out of all this after we get the CR in place till January 30th gives us a good chunk of time to do this. My prediction here is we get as many as, and it'd be great if it was this many, but I think it could be as many as eight of the appropriations bills done,

maybe a little north of that, and then we're going to CR the rest of it. I mean, I don't think we have any interest in conferencing a Homeland Security bill. We got Homeland Security all the money that they need in the reconciliation bill. So some of these other ones, state foreign operations, you know, you see that, maybe FSG is another one to CR. But if you could get, you know, the majority of these bills done, that's actually the closest we have been to regular order in years and years and years. So I actually think these eight Democrats, seven Democrats, one independent. In the Senate that voted for these, I think we're going to have support again to do this and get full funding bills. So we're not just continually living in a CR. I think some

of it at the end would be CR, but I think you're going to see over 80% of the discretionary budget actually appropriated in this fiscal year. That would be groundbreaking. Yes. And I was very pleased when they came out with a January date because that means that you and I won't be working on Christmas Eve. That's right. To pass a giant Christmas omnibus. Yeah. Congressman Riley Moore, thank you for coming on the Signal Sitdown. Thanks for having me. Remember, it's your government, and together we'll expose how it really works. See you next time.